Moving an investigation along in a timely way and addressing concerns are important. And the investigation should not begin with assumptions of anyone’s innocence or guilt. It should be possible to show reasonably how the results were reached. If accusations are fabricated...

This is quite helpful Theresa. I think the biggest issue here, is, wait for it, …communication! Part of me still struggles with wondering if it is possible to investigate a complaint by a party, gather information through an investigation through all parties, and end up by determining that the complaining party is more the problem than anyone else.

In our hypothetical, Tom and Sally reached out and made allegations to the mission leader. It seems fairly obvious this should have triggered an investigation. But we probably want to spend more time thinking about how investigations get started. When should you investigate? A number of situations may call for an investigation.

In your hypothetical, there is already a lack of mutual trust. Tom and Sally are seen as being perpetual complainers. And your mission leader isn’t consistent. He “usually” investigates and doesn’t have a methodical approach. So what do complainants have the right to know about the progress of an investigation and what is the effect of trust issues with leadership?

I can see where if you deal with complaints in a regular process, and document them, it makes for good protection. Two comments, though, one about confidentiality, and one about trust. In a perfect world, people see leadership as benevolent, compassionate, trustworthy (don’t laugh! I am going somewhere with this!). However, the reality is that we each project our own ...

Let’s talk about policies—the types of policies you should have and how people can report without either personnel or the company running into problems with retaliation. Your conduct and discipline policies should also prohibit retaliation, and a separate whistle-blower policy is a good idea. An important piece in avoiding sticky situations is to have a complaint or grievance procedure.

Hi Brent, Back in law school, sometimes the prof would weave the entire semester’s legal principles into one diabolical hypothetical, and the single exam question would be your entire grade for the course. The general answer is that Mission Leader in your hypothetical is in big trouble, and the mission is probably now facing a lawsuit.

Retaliation or whistle-blower lawsuits are the hottest thing in employment litigation, and missions should be aware of this. Good policies are important. Missions should encourage internal reporting of the violation of these policies, and have a well-defined investigation process. Leaders should also know how to avoid issues with retaliation, including how to deal with troublemakers. Read More→

Attorney Advertising D I S C L A I M E RP R I V A C Y P O L I C Y Because of the generality of the information on this site, it may not apply to a given place, time, or set of facts. It is not intended to be legal advice, and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.